Good point other than:AbortionTaxesBusiness regulationEnvironmentEducationGay rightsForeign PolicyCivil libertiesSocial ProgramsWorkers rightsMilitary SpendingEnergy PolicyAnd some other things they are EXACTLY the same.

markfara:Gary Johnson's not going to win a single state, and those who vote for him won't be proving a point in anyone's mind but their own.

strange comment. johnson voters want him to be president. that's why you vote for someone. because you want that person to win. i want johnson to be president. that's why i'm voting for him. and if enough of us vote for him, he'll win.

badaboom:TV's Vinnie: I hope you republicans all had your bungholes waxed today. You're gonna be on all 4's by 10PM for sure.

I'm just curious how many liberals subscribe to this line of thinking. Given that the electorate is about 50/50 do you truly believe this about half your fellow Americans? Why so much hatred? Does anyone else here support what TV Vinnie thinks? Or is he an outlier?

I'm thinking it is a result of the loud, repetitive, and wrong talking points spewed by most "conservative" friends/relatives/coworkers we are subjected to. We're expecting a Obama win due to polls and other data rather than a "gut feel" and are a bit giddy at the thought of rubbing their noses in it just a bit.

Replacing the shingles of the roof of a dilapidated and crumbling building every 4-8 years will not suddenly keep the weak foundation from sinking into the mud...

If that analogy doesn't help you see your faults, then look at it this way:

If you think the Republican outcry and childish partisanship tactics of the likes of Boehner and McConnell are bad because a Democrat is in the house, imagine what would happen if NEITHER party won... We would see a monumental 4 years in which both parties come together in a bi-partisan effort to completely render a third party president useless...

You think it's bad when a president is lame duck when one party is the majority and against you, try and imagine what would happen when BOTH parties are working together to stop your president in his tracks.

They have worked very hard to ensure a 2 party system is in their best interest... but it's not impossible to introduce a good third party option, but you have to build that party with a solid foundation... you must elect local, and state government officials, when the third party can show, on a state level, that they are there, and a real threat to the big 2, then you start filling the seats in the house, and fill the seats in the senate... make sure the numbers are even, you can't have 1 or 2 Libertarians, you need 33% to show them they are failing....

Carn:VA voter. I got there just about 8 and no lines. My district isn't huge but they said there were a ton of people from 6-7. I vote at an elementary school and the organizers really do a fantastic job every time.

GObama!

/there was a line in 2008 but I got there earlier.

In 2004, ,I stood in line for 2 hours. I looked at the selection in 2008 and felt neither candidate was worth it. Romney asked if I am doing better than 4 years ago, and the truth is: Yes I am. I am making double the money I was at that time at a much better Non-Profit Organization. He said he will stop government funding to NPO's, so he doesn't get my vote.

Romney wants to make me part of the problem by putting me out of work. Fark you, Romney.

You can bet that after Obama looses, all his supporters will cry their eyes out and biatch about how Romney "stole the vote", shot down planes carrying the military ballots, didn't get ballots to military personnel on time, had a bunch of dead people vote, intimidated voters, had Romney default on touch screen voting systems, cheated, etc.

You can bet that after Romney looses, all his supporters will cry their eyes out and biatch about how Obama "stole the vote", shot down planes carrying the military ballots, didn't get ballots to military personnel on time, had a bunch of dead people vote, intimidated voters, had Obama default on touch screen voting systems, cheated, etc.

markfara:strange comment. johnson voters want him to be president. that's why you vote for someone. because you want that person to win. i want johnson to be president. that's why i'm voting for him. and if enough of us vote for him, he'll win.

I have already voted, and i'm settled in at the democratic party staging area in Carlisle (330 east louder steet). i'm going to be busy here around 9am when our first shift of phone bankers and/or canvassers come in to pick up their packets. I will post updates/pictures via my twitter feed tho, @weaverxp if you're interested and/or want to harass me.

get out there and vote today people! And if you're a central Pa local, come on down to visit...get here before the donuts are gone though or i'm sending you back out for foodage. oh, and i'll be here until we close doors at 8pm! so come down and we'll put you to work.

Hugh2d2:I can't figure why ANYONE with a daughter would vote for Romney.

Heh - sounds like you eavesdropped on my conversation with my dad.

He asked me why the hell would I vote for Obama again? I'm all - uh Dad...do you not get how the GOP views me? I'm a 40 something divorced middle-aged woman and who had a college education and makes a good living: I have no place in GOP America. When the GOP can convince me that their version of smaller government doesn't mean one that will fit in my uterus, I'll give them some consideration.

I am very angry with the GOP for hijacking my once very cool dad and replacing him with a replicant.

xenophon10k:Nadie_AZ: shower_in_my_socks: Looks like Florida will go all 2000 on us again. Nate Silver: "Running one last projection based on this AM's polls. Our projected margin in Florida now Obama 49.797, Romney 49.775."

re: The Buttons. I really hope the Snarky Internet Generation becomes a formidable and reliable voting bloc soon. When you reach the intersection of "funny" and "right" you have to harness that power for all its worth.

Please Vote today, and please don't enable any disenfranchisement, voter interference or any other activity that stops voting of ANYONE. Agree with them or not, in America we must allow the vote to be clear of any perception of stealing, tampering or fraud. Vote stealing, rigging any thing disrupting someones ability to vote is treason.

skullkrusher:imontheinternet: cameroncrazy1984: d23: This is the only one that makes sense so far:

[i48.tinypic.com image 240x238]

Both Sides Are The Same has never made sense.

Being edgy is much cooler than being informed.

"Thier both like corporate and Wall Street and the electorate college is a scam anyway."

I don't think it is "edgy" to recognize that the two party system is more about big money than it is the natural result of candidate awesomeness

"Both sides are bad, so I'm not supporting either" is a cop-out, and many people choose it because they think it makes them look edgy and above it all. There are clearly-defined differences between the two candidates on a wide range of issues. The next term could see as many as three appointments to the Supreme Court, FFS. Stow the edgy teenager crap for one day, and do the right thing.

It can make sense if its coming from someone that actually knows what they are talking about rather than just making broad statements. However, I disagree that the two parties are the EXACTLY the same though.

What I don't understand is why many people think "low information voters" are only within the Republican and Democratic parties.

Herbie555:Martin Silenus: Voted in Bradenton, FL. The clerk gave me trouble. Swiped my card, then declared I was an "inactive voter." I told her this was impossible, as I had voted in 2008 and 2010. She looked miffed, called someone on the phone and kept spelling my name and birthdate for five minutes. And reluctantly admitted that I could indeed vote -- hell, she even said to this person "I'll LET him vote."

Stories like this make me kind of stabby...

Imagine how I felt, after spending two hours waiting in the goddamned rain to vote.

badaboom:TV's Vinnie: I hope you republicans all had your bungholes waxed today. You're gonna be on all 4's by 10PM for sure.

I'm just curious how many liberals subscribe to this line of thinking. Given that the electorate is about 50/50 do you truly believe this about half your fellow Americans? Why so much hatred? Does anyone else here support what TV Vinnie thinks? Or is he an outlier?

I can't speak for all Liberals, but my "hatred" is from being called a traitor for not supporting the Iraq invasion.

badaboom:TV's Vinnie: I hope you republicans all had your bungholes waxed today. You're gonna be on all 4's by 10PM for sure.

I'm just curious how many liberals subscribe to this line of thinking. Given that the electorate is about 50/50 do you truly believe this about half your fellow Americans? Why so much hatred? Does anyone else here support what TV Vinnie thinks? Or is he an outlier?

Fark the republican assholes. They've made life miserable for years now. Fark them.

So as an interested observer, I want to both get in my prediction (to create a sense of having a stake in the outcome, I will make a donation to the Sandy relief efforts in the amount of the cost of one (1) iPad mini*, payable in Canadian dollars if there is a split between the electoral college and the popular vote) else if I'll shoot a hundred anyway cause I care) and to offer some condolences either way (since politics in the US seems to inspire the same rabid outpourings as a cricket loss in India). *i.e. a gaget I want but don't need.

It won't really matter who wins. Yes, the winner gets to make some appointments to the Supreme Court, and a lot of people believe that if Romney wins, that means a return to the dark ages. The thing is, I believe a conservative judge is less danger than your House - and it's going to be Republican for the foreseeable future regardless. Call me naive, but your Supreme Court has pretty much done the right thing on the big issues, irrespective of who sits on the bench. So there's that.

I'm pretty sure I'll get called naive for the next one, but that's okay - the only slurs I object to are the pejorative uses of 'retard' and 'trans style slurs' (I can't object to any of the gay ones since they'd be true). It won't really matter about the tax differences either. Sure the math doesn't add up for Romney, but you can be sure that if it doesn't, that you will not see another Republican president until 2032 if they are lucky. If Obama is re-elected, you are going to see a Republican in the White House in 2016, book it, done. Either way, your amazing capacity for resilience will see you through - and quite likely stronger for it. Neither party will be able to survive the next four years without heavy compromise, and that will work in your favour if Romney should win.

For jobs - if Romney wins, you'll get to play a to scale game of battleship, and you'll get another war. Both will add to your debt, but will create jobs, so there's that. If Obama wins, you'll be manufacturing goods for export rather than goods for war. You'll also get a better educated populace, which is good, cause education directly impacts health, and since he's given you great health care, you'll have a larger population living to old age than you will under Romney's cull of the lower and middle classes. Really, sort of a wash (yes, I get that that view is a little callous, and more cynical than I typically am, but I truly believe that there is only one reason Presidents go to war willy-nilly and use other people's children as cannon fodder - and that reason is Malthusian in nature).

LGBTQ (did I forget a letter?) rights will stall in the legal sense under Romney, but there is no guarantee that the rights already enshrined in your Constitution will be explicitly upheld under Obama either, since the courts tend to try and view the intent of the framers through the lens of the late 1700s rather than realizing that they were framed in a way that would allow a country to grow in ways that hadn't yet been envisioned while still offering some of the greatest protections any nation has known from its inception. The repeal of don't ask, don't tell isn't going to be reversed, and the presence of Ellen on TV (as well as her ratings) pretty much ensures no one is headed back to the closet. LGBTQ rights have come farther, faster than any other civil right, and I am confident that in 50 more years our grandkids will be as puzzled over what the big deal was, as my kid is over the fact that interracial marriage was taboo 50 years ago.

I know there are more issues, but I've already droned on too long. With that in mind: tl;dr: It'll be okay. History is a long game, the BCS doesn't pick the candidates and the US has a winning record.

whidbey:Marine1: I don't see how voting for a man who isn't a whore for votes is "throwing away" a vote.

Because's it's just an idea. You have no viable numbers to support your decision.

Until you have tens of millions of people voting for Johnson, all you're doing is helping Romney get elected.

Now that's what I call a sense of entitlement. People like you actually assume that everyone that votes third party would have voted for your candidate if there was no third party available. How farking presumptuous can you get?

Marine1:whidbey: Marine1: I don't see how voting for a man who isn't a whore for votes is "throwing away" a vote.

Because's it's just an idea. You have no viable numbers to support your decision.

Until you have tens of millions of people voting for Johnson, all you're doing is helping Romney get elected.

Deal. Again, if Obama wants my vote, he can do the stuff to get it. No more NDAA crap, legalize weed (I don't even smoke it). Two easy things right there that could sway my vote. But, nope.

You do understand that the NDAA was attached to the defense spending bill and was passed with a VETO PROOF MAJORITY, right? In other words, had he not signed the bill, your buddies in the military would have not gotten paid, and after a delay where Obama would have been savaged for not caring about the troops the thing would have become law anyway. You get that right?

And do you also get that Obama is not the king? He cannot just waive his hand and make pot legal.

This brings me to the point about Republicans: Why do they let some Australian control their political views? Murdoch owns Fox and he has more control over the political views of our country than our own damn president. How do God Fearing 'Muricans fall for this? They aren't real Americans is why, they're 'Muricans!

Somacandra:Wyalt Derp: I've given this election a great deal of thought, and I'm afraid I simply can't vote for either candidate.

There are probably MORE than two candidates on your Presidential ballot, plus of host of other races, judicial retention or ballot questions. You did research your ballot and all the candidates before today, right ? Don't make me go Red Forman on you.

A lot of THIS. There are so many downballot races and initiatives that are important locally that to throw your hands up at the Presidential candidates is not an excuse. Local politics matter. Local initiatives really matter, because a lot of times, they'll determine the funding that your area will get for infrastructure or modernization.

doyner:Leeds: You can take comfort in the fact that Philly will go for the black man, regardless of how you wanted to vote or who you thought was better.

I know it feels good to vote and I'm sorry that you didn't straighten this out before the election, but if your profile is correct and you really are in Philly then your vote is as meaningless as can be.

It DOES matter. Staes don't have an internal electoral college--raw state-wide popular vote is the deciding factor.

This. Leeds is being an idiot. Vote. It matters. There is no such thing as a meaningless ballot. If you believe that, then you believe that the American experiment itself is meaningless. And if you feel that way, today of all days, then I feel sorry for you.

I have already voted, and i'm settled in at the democratic party staging area in Carlisle (330 east louder steet). i'm going to be busy here around 9am when our first shift of phone bankers and/or canvassers come in to pick up their packets. I will post updates/pictures via my twitter feed tho, @weaverxp if you're interested and/or want to harass me.

get out there and vote today people! And if you're a central Pa local, come on down to visit...get here before the donuts are gone though or i'm sending you back out for foodage. oh, and i'll be here until we close doors at 8pm! so come down and we'll put you to work.

and you all deserve everything you'll get tonight and more. because you made your bets on wall street and corporate slugs sitting on their fat asses in corporate Boardrooms, not The People.

you made your bet against Democracy, and tonight/tomorrow you will pay the price.

so F*ck off!

Actually, I'm indifferent about who wins.What inspired me to vote was a self righteous arrogant poster similar to yourself. I felt it was my civic duty to nullify his vote. Sort of like a cock punch for that loudmouth in you local watering hole.

Hopefully you have served as a inspiration to some undecided voter who will follow suit and nullify your vote in a similar fashion.

See, I win, you lose.

Are there any studies out there on how people grudge voted?

Nullify his vote? You mean vote for theofascism and Bush advisers and Bush-era policies.

I remember the polls favoring Kerry just before the election back in '04 as well. I voted for Bush that year - first time I was eligible to vote. In '08 I voted for McCain. So I am 1 out of 2 so far. Today I am voting for Romney and there is no doubt in my mind that he's going to win it.

Ehy you don't votef Romney Obama either same. Where? Polls closed. Smart choicer is Libraaterian.Its easy to steel candy from your pet. But when does this also? Yes. Careful to voter machines. Absentee your vote or to stand in line with people withour soaps. Good bleeds.

Last time i skipped an election Bush got a 2nd term - i was young naive and too stoned to go out to the polls.

Just cast my vote here in Florida, had some nice small talk with the old church ladies about how much my beard looks like their husband's. Also having previously only voted in Georgia, i had to double take at Ron Swanson on the ballot before i remembered he's a real person here - this state is so odd.

Just finished voting in Ohio. Asked for a paper ballot, cause I dont want to deal with the shenanigans around the voting machines.

Was sad that I couldnt vote for Rocky Anderson, even though I wanted to badly. I realize now that write-in rules/laws are REALLY DUMB. Because you can 'write in' anyone, but if the EV delegates havent pledged to vote for that person, your vote doesnt count.

Insatiable Jesus:Corvus: You seem to not able to focus (I notice this with a lot of crazy people). Do Mitt Romney and Obama have the same stance on those issues or not?

It doesn't matter a hooting hell what either of their "stance on those issues" may be.

The closest thing to any sort of real elected power in DC is the US Senate (House of Lords). Take a look at how the Senate votes - kind of blows your party-centric view of politics out of the water. The Senate is the House for rich people. Your Congressman makes a great show of fighting for you, your Senator kills it and you continue to throat that Koch.

Tools.

Blade Runner World in 20 years

Dude. Or dudette. I understand. I do.I believe you.It's real. Quite a bit of what you say is true.

Caveat- what if things just go on the way they do?

I called running man world 20 years ago.

I'm still fighting against it. Because I believe that money won't win.

That makes me no less realistic. It's the very same apathy you speak of- that all sides are the same- that has folks going to the polls in big numbers.The apathy is gone. If one side's just going to lie, and lie poorly, well, they're just not putting in enough effort.Don't even give me the dignity of trying to lie pretty? That makes me mad.

I just found something really interesting for all you Nate Silver fans

1. Nate Silver

When "Poblano" began publishing his 2008 presidential election predictions and analyses on Daily Kos in 2007, people paid attention. Then "Poblano" moved to his own blog, FiveThirtyEight.com, where he later revealed he was really Nate Silver, the guy behind PECOTA, a system that predicts Major League Baseball players' performances. After Silver accurately predicted the results of 49 of 50 states' 2008 election results (and all 35 Senate races), FiveThirtyEight moved to The New York Times. But none of the eyes on Silver this week will catch him at the polls: he has not voted since he moved to the Times and doesn't intend to this year, though he told Charlie Rose that if he did, "it would be kind of a Gary Johnson versus Mitt Romney decision."

Just in from voting. The polling station is literally next door. There was next to no one in the place but a ton of people milling around outside. The guy in front of me tried voting but wasn't registered in the state of Michigan and had no identification aside from a credit card. He even insisted that the old man at the table call his girlfriend to "prove it's me."

The angry old man told him to leave before telling me that I couldn't vote since I had requested an absentee ballot. I told him that I thought I was going to be out of the state during the election but did not leave, and that I had the township clerk's office cancel the ballot. He said, "You can't vote twice. Please leave." Accusing me of trying to vote twice really pissed me off. I demanded that he call the clerk's office to verify that my ballot had been cancelled but he refused, so another volunteer did. Everything worked out and I voted, but...

....the ballot scanning machine was completely broken and there was no back-up or replacement available. A lady eating a pulled pork BBQ sandwich told me that the clerk and his staff were coming to count them in person. Remarkable.

Geotpf:Let's hope it doesn't come down to Florida. Nate's current projection on who will win Florida-exactly 50-50.

I think both sides can agree that we don't want Florida to decide again.

And the fact that they are still having problems with their voting equipment is infuriating to me. I know Florida is America's dick, but can't they stop acting like dicks just long enough to fix the problems with their polling stations?

For a while I thought you'd have to be brain-dead to be an undecided voter after all the information that was being put out there regarding our presidential election. However, last night I looked in the mirror and realized that I was, in fact, one of those wishy-washy undecideds.

The thing is, I wasn't undecided between President Obama and Governor Romney. Despite only having ever affiliated myself with the Republican Party, I am now a proud "decline to state", and am disgusted at how extreme the GOP has taken not just their own party, but also the national dialectic and the world by hostage.

Couple that with Romney's brazen flurry of lies to the face of the nation, there is no way I could vote for a Republican in this election.

But what about those third parties? I like the Greens, though I don't think they take into account how difficult their policies would be for most low and middle income Americans in the short run. In the long run, we as a nation need to take our medicine, but if Jimmy Carter showed us anything 30 years ago, its that we don't want to take it and aren't willing to pay the short term economic cost associated with retooling and refocusing our economy to sustainability.

And the Libertarians, man, they sure have a beautiful rhetorical edge compared to the other parties, and exemplify all of the purity in political thought that drew me to the Republican party in the first place by emphasizing personal responsibility and meritocracy. But the way the economy is stacked right now, I just don't think its feasible to remove the regulatory referees, or to flatten the tax code. The big corporations that already dominate the international political and economic system would just run hog wild and squish all the little guys.

So despite really wanting to cast a protest vote for Jill Stein or Gary Johnson, I voted for President Obama. Even though as a Californian, my Electoral Vote goes to him no matter what, he deserves it. Our President faced blatant contemptuous obstructionism from the GOP for 4 years and has accomplished an astonishing amount of executive and legislative achievements despite that, by compromising even when many would have preferred he stood his ground. He's a solid president, capable of critical thought, nuance, gravitas, humor, and appropriate resolve in the face of crisis. Even though I'm not a fan of his drone or NDAA stance, or failing to close Guantanamo, or deliver a public option, or stick to his state rights policy on drug enforcement, he really is as good a politician as we have in the 21st century.

In all my years on Fark, the Weaver transition shift from right-wing pro business nutter to moderate conservative to independent conservative to conservative that reluctantly accepts democrats as lesser of two evils to person working at democratic staging area is fascinating.

It has been really weird to watch the transition over the past 5-7 years.

heading into the home stretch - polls close in 4 hours. still no evidence of GOP efforts to get out the vote. At this point i'm going to officially call it and say the Republican party abandoned Pennsylvania.

skullkrusher:imontheinternet: skullkrusher: imontheinternet: Doing the right thing is pulling your head out of the sand, looking at the differences between the candidates, which are real and easy to find, and then making a decision based on which candidate shares your views. Waiving off the candidates by saying, "they're all the same and corrupt anyway" is a cop-out. Full stop.

You want to know the "cop-out"? It is everyone who equates "both sides are undesirable" or "I don't match up well with either party" with "both sides are the exactly the same". Far too many use that to waive off valid concerns about "your" candidate. LOL objectively false! It's bullshiat. We're not saying they're "the same" except in how we find them both undesirable.

Every candidate is not equally bad. Pretending that they are is an objectively false cop-out. If you think there should be some perfect candidate who is tailor-made to match your views exactly, you're living in Magic Fairyland.

Pretending I said they are when I just said the opposite in the very post to which you responded is dishonest and feeble.Try harder.

Where did I ever get the idea that you said both sides were equally undesirable?

Oh, FFS. It was a poorly calibrated touchscreen. It didn't change the vote. It wasn't like Obama was actually selected on screen, and then the machine flipped it to Romney. They tapped Obama, and it selected Romney. If they had tapped the button for Jill Stein, Obama would have been selected.

So, yes it should be taken out of service, but let's not attribute to malice that which can be adequately be explained by a poll worker messing up the settings. Hell, I'm amazed the damn things work at all, given the average technical expertise on display at most polling places.

Seriously - when is the last time you have had to calibrate a touchscreen? When we were using them in medical environments in 2000 we didn't need to calibrate them - you ran them at their normal resolution and they "just worked." The last touchscreen I've actually had to calibrate was back in the late 90's, and that was on a windows CE phone.

And based on his troubleshooting "miscalibration" doesn't seem to be correct. If it was, when he pressed on the Jill Stein button, it should have registered for Obama (screen miscalibrated on the Y axis). In his case he had to go push a nonsensical area of the screen to get it to work for Obama, while all other buttons worked correctly. That doesn't sound like a miscalibration to me - does it sound like one to you? When you have a cartesian plane defined in software (calibrated), you don't suddenly lose a section of it and place it somewhere else on the plane - the whole plane shifts.

robsul82:Car_Ramrod: Giuliani just said on CNN that Benghazi is the most important issue in this election.

Which begs the question: WHY THE FARK IS GIULIANI STILL ALLOWED ON TV?

Guiliani saying the Sandy response was worse than Katrina and demanding Obama's resignation over Benghazi...that dude is one giant political hack at this point, lol, damn.

That part particularly smacked my gob. Is he not aware the high marks Obama and the federal government received on their response to Sandy? High marks given by the American people at large, and people not exactly friendly to Obama such as Chris Christie. To claim Obama and FEMA failed in their response is to completely ignore reality in favor of political rage. The woman interviewing him just kinda stood there, not sure how to respond. I wonder if she thought about bringing up counterpoints and just decided, "fark it", but knowing CNN, it's not their business to challenge talking points.

The Irresponsible Captain:Frankly, I'd be shocked if this is wrong. Oh, I'm not saying it's impossible for Romney to win. It's possible. It's just highly improbable.

Currently the Intrade Odds are: Obama-72.0 Romney-29.6Frankly, that shows a lot of confidence.

In my mind, the big question is does Obama carry Virginia and therefore the result is called early, or does Virginia remain a toss-up until the last minute. Perhaps it even turns out solid Romney. Either of the last two scenario will make it a long night waiting for results, and I thoroughly expect a long night coming.

This isn't like 2008 where Obama has it wrapped up in a pretty ribbon, he's fighting for the vote this year.

The chance of a quick, decisive call that would signal the end of the race, like Virginia for Obama, are virtually zero. Even if all the data is there three seconds after the polls close, the networks aren't going to throw away an entire night's worth of high ratings on a quick call.

Zerochance:HighOnCraic: sigdiamond2000: HighOnCraic: Anyone who takes Gary Johnson seriously after his fake debate with an Obama impersonator should be mocked relentlessly.

That cannot possibly have actually happened.

Tell me that's some kind of elaborate Photoshop, please.

Yes, it actually happened, back in June, 2011, hence my desire to relentlessly mock Gary Johnson supporters. Ditto Ron Paul, who took part in a similar farce on Stossel's show.

[img.photobucket.com image 320x358]

This is a screen cap from my Paultard co-worker's FB feed. Dude had no idea that Ron Paul had debated an Obama impersonator with a straight face.

They worship the guy, and yet they know so little about him.

/may have to zoom a bit. Sorry about the quality.

That's the farked-up part: both Johnson and Paul took part in the fake debates because they knew people would be fooled into supporting them after their "win" over the Obama impersonator. Anyone smart enough to see through the charade wasn't gonna support Johnson or Paul to begin with.

chopit:God's Hubris: Made a bet in my Fantasy Football league with the 344 Romney landslide guy from yesterday. If Obama wins, he gives me Tom Brady, if Romney wins, I give him AJ Green.

That's beautiful. Not only is his guy going to lose, he gets to watch his fantasy team stink for the rest of the season. Well played, old chap.

I made a bet with both my boss and my dad.If Romney wins, I have to detail my boss's car and I cannot ever bring up W to my dad.When Obama wins, my boss will detail my car, and my dad cannot ever mention Benghazi to me.

Brain_Damage:I have to stop at the grocery store on the way home from work and need help deciding what dinner would be suitable for watching the Republican melt down on Fox/Freeperville/etc. Suggestions?

xenophon10k:Nadie_AZ: shower_in_my_socks: Looks like Florida will go all 2000 on us again. Nate Silver: "Running one last projection based on this AM's polls. Our projected margin in Florida now Obama 49.797, Romney 49.775."

Wow. I thought Obama had no chance in Florida.

Looks like it's gonna be a squeaker.

Most everyone in line with me for Early voting had their Republican party sample ballot guide in hand ready to go. If Obama wins Florida I'll be impressed. I'm still kinda surprised how many people I know siding with Romney in Florida I would've thought were clear Democrats. :P And then there's the few I know that when Obama wins I'll start seeing facebook posts about the true patriots rising up for another civil war.. Haven't defriended them because it's mildly entertaining :P

xenophon10k:Nadie_AZ: shower_in_my_socks: Looks like Florida will go all 2000 on us again. Nate Silver: "Running one last projection based on this AM's polls. Our projected margin in Florida now Obama 49.797, Romney 49.775."

Wow. I thought Obama had no chance in Florida.

Looks like it's gonna be a squeaker.

I sooooo want Obama to win FL; Romney's pretty much cooked at that point, with or without OH.

In case anyone wants to check out an excellent political documentary before the results roll in -

R.J. Cutler's followup to The War Room. Criminally underseen, about the 1994 Senate race in Virginia between Oliver North and Chuck Robb. Lot of early signposts in there as to how politics got so farked up by 2012.

I was thinking...who should i check the news to see coverage of the election....Fox news obviously slanted, problem is , most news places are slanted one way or another (our newspaper endorses ____!) so I really couldn't think of a news outlet that would be unbiased..... I had to go out of the country.... and chose BBC and Reuters. Sad, really.

shower_in_my_socks:dletter: Anyone think that if there was good "exit polling" for the GOP that Drudge would have leaked it out by now?

I believe the networks have agreed to sit on the exit polling numbers until 5pm ET, due to accuracy concerns since they farked it up in 2004 and had people thinking Kerry was going to win. Any exit poll figures you hear before then should be taken with a big grain of salt.

If the networks agreed to sit on them, Drudge would definitely be leaking them.

Oh, FFS. It was a poorly calibrated touchscreen. It didn't change the vote. It wasn't like Obama was actually selected on screen, and then the machine flipped it to Romney. They tapped Obama, and it selected Romney. If they had tapped the button for Jill Stein, Obama would have been selected.

So, yes it should be taken out of service, but let's not attribute to malice that which can be adequately be explained by a poll worker messing up the settings. Hell, I'm amazed the damn things work at all, given the average technical expertise on display at most polling places.

No, that's what I thought at first, too. All the other button areas were working correctly. It was not a calibration issue. Read the article:

Oh, FFS. It was a poorly calibrated touchscreen. It didn't change the vote. It wasn't like Obama was actually selected on screen, and then the machine flipped it to Romney. They tapped Obama, and it selected Romney. If they had tapped the button for Jill Stein, Obama would have been selected.

He stated that he tried to select Stein in hopes that it would select Obama, but it selected Stein correctly. Unfortunately that wasn't caught on video but that's what the person claims.

Had to vote with a provisional ballot today, because apparently they still don't know where the fark I live. I asked the lady at the precinct if she was putting my provisional ballot into the shredder. LULZ.

California has some great props and shiat this year, including outlawing the death penalty and revising our barbaric three-strikes law. Whenever I hear people say they aren't voting because they don't like the candidates, I just shake my head. THAT ISN'T ALL YOU'RE VOTING FOR, MR. "I FAILED HIGH SCHOOL CIVICS."

Oh, FFS. It was a poorly calibrated touchscreen. It didn't change the vote. It wasn't like Obama was actually selected on screen, and then the machine flipped it to Romney. They tapped Obama, and it selected Romney. If they had tapped the button for Jill Stein, Obama would have been selected.

So, yes it should be taken out of service, but let's not attribute to malice that which can be adequately be explained by a poll worker messing up the settings. Hell, I'm amazed the damn things work at all, given the average technical expertise on display at most polling places.

Elvis_Bogart:Just vote, damn you. I don't care who you vote for, just get off your ass and do it. At least pretend to give a rat's ass.

No, don't "pretend" to give a rat's ass. If you can't be bothered to educate yourself, then don't bother to vote. Some of us have paid attention and actually care about the outcome. If you can't be bothered to turn off Here Comes Honey Boo Boo and read something then you deserve whatever you get and I'd prefer you have no say in our government.

It can make sense if its coming from someone that actually knows what they are talking about rather than just making broad statements. However, I disagree that the two parties are the EXACTLY the same though.

What I don't understand is why many people think "low information voters" are only within the Republican and Democratic parties.

I didn't say they were exactly the same, either. However, if you look at what the corporations want they're 98% the same. That's why so much of the crazy SOCHULIZUM rhetoric was so stupid.

WombatControl:badaboom: TV's Vinnie: I hope you republicans all had your bungholes waxed today. You're gonna be on all 4's by 10PM for sure.

I'm just curious how many liberals subscribe to this line of thinking. Given that the electorate is about 50/50 do you truly believe this about half your fellow Americans? Why so much hatred? Does anyone else here support what TV Vinnie thinks? Or is he an outlier?

Sadly, modern-day "liberals" talk about tolerance, they don't practice. Their idea of "tolerance" is more accurately termed "shutting the fark up and getting in line with the program."

Citation? What modern day liberal wants tolerance for hateful moronic Republicans?

Honestly I get where they are coming from. You can bet we'd be hearing it from the Left if there were a huge Romney mural in a polling place.Although over on DailyKos they said they'll feel sorry for GOP voters in that polling place when Black people in the South no longer have to walk past statues of rebel soldiers on their way to vote, so y'know, grain of salt from evaporated neocon tears and all that.

robsul82:Luke Russert says Obama has a 66K (10 point) lead in early voting in Iowa?

I don't take anything Luke says seriously after he pimped the fark out of the "horserace" media meme following the first debate and did his best on Twitter to downplay Ryan getting his ass kicked by Biden.

Go back to the VP Debate Threads, I posted some idiotic tweets of his during the debate.

Went out for lunch and on the drive I was listening to Fox News and CNN news (flip flopping between channels during commercials).

CNN Stuff: Polls are open, up to 3 hour waits, people are willing to walk through fire to have their vote count. Interview people in line. Gave informative information on how votes are being cast in hurricane torn New York districts.

Fox News stuff: Republicans hoping to stem voter fraud were removed from Polling Stations by Police! Voter Fraud! Voter Fraud! FEMA is doing a TERRIBLE job in New york and New Jersey, when Bush ran FEMA, everyone got what they wanted when they wanted it.

Anyone who takes Gary Johnson seriously after his fake debate with an Obama impersonator should be mocked relentlessly.

On Thursday night, the sometimes-shirtless Stossel and his pal, Mustache, invited Brown and former New Mexico governor Gary Johnson onto their tv show to participate in a pretend debate. It was all such good, clean fun! Ha. But as this clip from Media Matters for America shows, Johnson seems to have taken the whole thing far too seriously-even knocking his head on his podium a few times to indicate frustration with the Fauxbama:

Link

How could anyone vote for a candidate who's willing to do something so silly to get attention?

/Ron Paul fans, I'm also looking in your direction.

Link

I think this is where Clint Eastwood found inspiration. I mean, if you want to debate your version of your opponent, why do you even need a person there? Just do both sides of the conversation yourself. It's way more efficient.

Anyone who takes Gary Johnson seriously after his fake debate with an Obama impersonator should be mocked relentlessly.

On Thursday night, the sometimes-shirtless Stossel and his pal, Mustache, invited Brown and former New Mexico governor Gary Johnson onto their tv show to participate in a pretend debate. It was all such good, clean fun! Ha. But as this clip from Media Matters for America shows, Johnson seems to have taken the whole thing far too seriously-even knocking his head on his podium a few times to indicate frustration with the Fauxbama:

Link

How could anyone vote for a candidate who's willing to do something so silly to get attention?

/Ron Paul fans, I'm also looking in your direction.

Link

You can mock me relentlessly, but you honestly don't sound very witty.

mediablitz:Marine1: No shiat. Maybe if guys like you stopped saying "HURR, YER THROWIN' AWAY YER VOTE THERE, CLEETUS" whenever we actually speak our minds on a ballot, we wouldn't have to choose between two mediocre candidates every four years.

Maybe if guys like you stopped trying to be trendy by voting for the "cool" 3rd party candidate who is just another failed Republican that switched to "Libertarian" and you fell for that shiat, we could get somewhere on REAL 3rd party reform.

Rocky Anderson. Jill Stein. None of you desperate to prove how cool you are "I'm third party!" farks ever mention anyone but Gary "I'll say whatever I need to now that the Libertarians will take me" Johnson.

You are WORSE than those voting for the two parties. You are willfully ignorant in the name of being "cool".

You keep saying this Bullshiat.

Voted for Obama last time because he made it clear that he stood for x, y and z. When it turned out he wasn't going to follow suit and vote the way he said he would, I looked for another candidate that I agree with on policy. Gary Johnson was that person. He sold me on his platform when he did a very candid ask me anything on reddit. He actually answered tough questions. I don't agree with the guy on everything but on the stuff we do agree on NONE of the other candidates have differing opinions. Jill Stein was a consideration for my vote but to be honest I don't like some of her positions.

It isn't "cool" to vote 3rd party, if anything EVERYONE gets pissed at you for some crazy reason. I voted 3rd party because morally I cannot vote for Obama, Romney agrees with much of the Obama platform that i have huge issues with So essentially Jill Stein or Gary Johnson were the only other choices. I live in a HUGE blue state so voting 3rd party doesn't at all help the GOP here. I just think there needs to be more voices at the table and helping any party with national representation or matching funds the next go around is important.

CXUnison:Long time lurker, first time poster. (Made the account last night)I"ve lost FB friends, not spoken to relatives, and have seen far too much derp on my TV.I've been lurking here since just before the 2008 election, and I've been here pretty much every night until 3:00AM since the GOP primaries. You've kept me sane. I finally decided to join but it took a while because of the verbal beatdown I feared I might get, but now I think I can take it. I just wanted to say that I was here, when the walls fell. I'll post something more useless later, I've got way to much crow to prepare right now.

\Be nice, or don't. It's all good.

=================

As a fellow liter - welcome to the party (so to speak). NO hate, herp or derp here -- I can relate to the losing FB friends over the election and I'm currently observing radio silence there to avoid the outright lies I've had to read / endure.

The latest was the friend in NC who claimed that the Navy SEALs were going to show up to "intimidate" the Black Panthers - but had no source for this claim... I can't wait for it to be over.

quickdraw:pseudoscience: markfara: Gary Johnson's not going to win a single state, and those who vote for him won't be proving a point in anyone's mind but their own.

Hopefully, the grownups will make the right decision.

Actually, if a third party candidate can manage 5% of the vote, then they are eligible for federal campaign funding.

"Minor party candidates and new party candidates may become eligible for partial public funding of their general election campaigns. (A minor party candidate is the nominee of a party whose candidate received between 5 and 25 percent of the total popular vote in the preceding Presidential election. A new party candidate is the nominee of a party that is neither a major party nor a minor party.) The amount of public funding to which a minor party candidate is entitled is based on the ratio of the party's popular vote in the preceding Presidential election to the average popular vote of the two major party candidates in that election. A new party candidate receives partial public funding after the election if he/she receives 5 percent or more of the vote. The entitlement is based on the ratio of the new party candidate's popular vote in the current election to the average popular vote of the two major party candidates in the election."

Link

You still need to start grassroots. You need to be making a difference at the local level. You cant have a third party president when the rest of the country is still Dems and Gops. To me its ridiculous to even try for the POTUS with a party that barely 5% supports. Tea Party did it by being funded and swallowed up by the GOP. The only possible contender for a viable 3rd party is the Occupy movement. If they continue to do more relief work and community organizing then I can see them being a contending political party in 8 years.

Agreed, except it would still be a big deal to get public campaign funding, especially if we can get the damn PACs out of here. Also, disagree about Occupy - love the idea, but they've farked up too much already and everyone thinks they're crazy. Maybe if they start fresh...

ZeroPly:scubamage: Atypical Person Reading Fark: markfara: Gary Johnson's not going to win a single state, and those who vote for him won't be proving a point in anyone's mind but their own.

Hopefully, the grownups will make the right decision.

Derpity derp.

He's got a point. If the win was decided by popular vote, he'd be derping. However the way the electoral college works effectively shuts out any 3rd party voter unless they manage to get enough votes to actually win a state. About the best Johnson could hope for would be hitting 5% and getting equal representation on all ballots for the next election and federal funding for 2016.

Since federal funding is now infinitesimally small compared to the PACs who now control the stage, it really, honestly won't matter. If Johnson had the PACs behind him, he'd be plastered on half the billboards we see already.

Except it's not a pass-fail on the 5% number. What if Johnson gets 4.5%? That will give a HUGE impetus next election to put the Libertarian candidate over that 5% and will raise their support significantly. How about 4%? That'll be a huge boost too. I'm sure Johnson would take 3.5% and go home happy. So your vote in Illinois for him counts proportionately to the total number of votes cast. Your vote for Romney means nothing - all 20 electoral votes are going to Obama, period.

It's better to see this in terms of an Overton window than as possible vs impossible for this particular election.

Cybernetic:lohphat: DontMakeMeComeBackThere: NateGrey: If Romney wins, God help us all.not a damn thing will change

Elections. Matter.

[jimcgreevy.com image 850x680]

Your graphic conveniently omits Obama's deficits. The guy who called W's deficits "unpatriotic" has made W look like an amateur. This is fourth year in a row with a deficit in excess $1 trillion.

That's your idea of responsible governance?

Oh you mean the deficits inherited by having to bail out the GOP deregulated banking sector or actually putting war costs on the books instead of hiding them for 8 years or do you mean TARP which GWB signed?

CXUnison:Long time lurker, first time poster. (Made the account last night)I"ve lost FB friends, not spoken to relatives, and have seen far too much derp on my TV.I've been lurking here since just before the 2008 election, and I've been here pretty much every night until 3:00AM since the GOP primaries. You've kept me sane. I finally decided to join but it took a while because of the verbal beatdown I feared I might get, but now I think I can take it. I just wanted to say that I was here, when the walls fell. I'll post something more useless later, I've got way to much crow to prepare right now.

\Be nice, or don't. It's all good.

Yeah, that pretty much happened to me when I said I thought Picard was better than Kirk.

star_topology:In all seriousness, when Johnson's campaign as a Republican crashed and burned, why did he go Independent/Libertarian? Out of spite? Out of necessity? Why would you vote for someone who isn't interested in building a viable third party from the ground up?

I may be answering my own question here, but did he run as a Republican to get his name out there because no one would know who he was otherwise if he ran Independent/Libertarian from the get-go?

Necessity plays a big role, I think. You need a party with national recognition to get on ballots (and for funding purposes), so building that party from the ground up is extremely hard unless one picks up the mantle from someone like Nader. But even the Green party in 96 and 2000 didn't get to the 5% popular vote needed for federal funding in the next election.

Ross Perot may have seriously screwed third party politics for a while by not turning the Reform Party into something other than the party of Ross Perot. They had the popular votes for funding. After that, Democrats and Republicans learned not to invite other guys to the party (read: debates) anymore.

Can someone explain to me (aside from lowest bid government work) why voting machine touch screens need to be 'calibrated'? People speak as if this is a known thing, but I haven't had to calibrate even a consumer level device's touch screen since the Palm devices and the ATMs, movie ticket vending machines, etc... that are everywhere just seem to 'work'.

Are these just really crappy machines or is there some other reason people accept this? I'm a technologist, and the head-nodding around this issue really bothers me.

Headso:if you go to cnn or msnbc they are talking about voting in general and doing some feel good stories and looks back. If you go to fox they are whining about some conspiracy involving an Obama mural, you can pretty much tell where this election is going by that alone.

Yep, and keep in mind that the networks are getting exit polling data in real time. They're holding it until polls close by agreement.

Yes, "progressive" policies. Like being able to label people as "security threats" and detain them indefinitely. Getting felt-up by a high-school dropout at the airport before I can get on the plane is another "progressive" policy as well. Maybe we can have third-party candidates arrested for protesting being excluded from debates as well. You know. For "progress".

I'm not even going to debate any of that.

I just want to know where your army is. A few million people saying they're going to vote for Gary Johnson isn't going to cut it.

No shiat. Maybe if guys like you stopped saying "HURR, YER THROWIN' AWAY YER VOTE THERE, CLEETUS" whenever we actually speak our minds on a ballot, we wouldn't have to choose between two mediocre candidates every four years.

w00t! I threw my vote for Obama into the big tub of ignorance that is the state of Kansas. It was quickly surrounded by the less sophisticated votes until it succumbed. Hopefully my vote for state reps gets a little more traction.

Tor_Eckman:Marine1: Hey man, I don't consider "No, you can't just label people terrorists and detain them indefinitely" an "empty gesture". Quite a few people don't. But hey, again, if you're willing to throw due process under the bus for political expediency, go ahead.

Are you really this dense, or are you just deliberately missing the point?

How's that dense? I don't want the President to authorize that. I don't want Congress to do so either, but at least the President could get his two cents in. Instead, nope, we let some dicks in Congress piss all over rights.

Woah, you can vote against someone? I thought you could only vote for candidates.

I can't believe the morans that tell people to go out and vote, and then biatch and whine when they do. Presumably everyone that stayed home would definitely have voted for Obama too. And dead people, who were too inconsiderate to even cling onto life for a few more measly months. Curse them all!

Marine1:Hey man, I don't consider "No, you can't just label people terrorists and detain them indefinitely" an "empty gesture". Quite a few people don't. But hey, again, if you're willing to throw due process under the bus for political expediency, go ahead.

You should probably talk to Congress, seeing as it was they who first wrote the bill granting the President that power and then passed it with veto-proof majorities (meaning it would be law regardless of what the President did and didn't do). Also, they're the only ones that can undo it.

Are you somehow under the impression that Mitt Romney would do either of those things?

Hell no. That's why I didn't vote for him.

You are voting for him.

Okay, I've been told that by voting for Johnson, I was voting for Obama. This was by my conservative family. Now I come on here and you guys are telling me I voted for Romney.

Which one is it?

C'mon, tell me. I'm waiting.

You're helping Romney win this one. No question.

You're joining the rednecks and the racists and the other frankly dregs of society who are voting against progressive policies. Why on earth would you want to be counted amongst them, if you don't share their beliefs?

Yes, "progressive" policies. Like being able to label people as "security threats" and detain them indefinitely. Getting felt-up by a high-school dropout at the airport before I can get on the plane is another "progressive" policy as well. Maybe we can have third-party candidates arrested for protesting being excluded from debates as well. You know. For "progress".

whidbey:It's the same thing. There is no viable 3rd party in this country. It's a means to split votes.

sweet jesus man, acknowledge the fact that if he wants to vote for scooby-farking-doo, that's his own problem. you're advocating people not vote for who they want to, and that's asstarded - you wouldn't respond to it receptively, why is it you'd expect anyone else to be different?

Tor_Eckman:Marine1: Tor_Eckman: Marine1: whidbey: Marine1: I don't see how voting for a man who isn't a whore for votes is "throwing away" a vote.

Because's it's just an idea. You have no viable numbers to support your decision.

Until you have tens of millions of people voting for Johnson, all you're doing is helping Romney get elected.

Deal. Again, if Obama wants my vote, he can do the stuff to get it. No more NDAA crap, legalize weed (I don't even smoke it). Two easy things right there that could sway my vote. But, nope.

You do understand that the NDAA was attached to the defense spending bill and was passed with a VETO PROOF MAJORITY, right? In other words, had he not signed the bill, your buddies in the military would have not gotten paid, and after a delay where Obama would have been savaged for not caring about the troops the thing would have become law anyway. You get that right?

And do you also get that Obama is not the king? He cannot just waive his hand and make pot legal.

Good grief.

So... people not getting paid is worth trading freedom for... right? Right? And I don't care if he could have been overridden. Sometimes you have to lose, even if you're doing what's right.

He has the authority to sign executive orders stopping quite a bit of the DEA's activities. Hell, to start off with, Holder let MJ dispensers run. Then... again... back to prohibition.

No, dinglefutz. Vetoing the defense spending bill would have accomplished NOTHING other than to delay it's inevitable passage. It would have been a completely empty gesture that would have made him look good for a few idealists like you and made him look bad to everyone else. You do have to consider these kinds of things when you are the president.

Maybe you want a president that makes empty gestures. I want one that's smart enough to know when to pick his battles.

Hey man, I don't consider "No, you can't just label people terrorists and detain them indefinitely" an "empty gesture". Quite a few people don't. But hey, again, if you're willing to throw due process under the bus for political expediency, go ahead.